Ho v Bragg

Ho v Bragg

The applicant is likely to establish at trial that publication of the confidential documents should not be allowed due to their private nature, absence of justification, and blackmail element; interim non-disclosure and delivery up orders are justified pending the return day.

Parties
Applicant: Faye Clementina Ho; Respondent: Adam Bragg
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 February 2018
Procedural Posture
Interim Application for Injunction / Interim Relief Before Return Day
Outcome
Interim injunction granted
Legal Topics
Interim Injunctions, Non Disclosure Orders, Blackmail, Freedom of Expression
Civil Procedure Media Law Human Rights Interim Injunctions Non Disclosure Orders Blackmail Freedom of Expression

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Faye Clementina Ho

Applicant

Adam Bragg

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interim Application for Injunction / Interim Relief Before Return Day

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether interim non-disclosure and delivery up orders should be granted against the respondent
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has met the threshold for interim relief under s.12 Human Rights Act 1998

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant is likely to establish at trial that publication of the confidential documents should not be allowed due to their private nature, absence of justification, and blackmail element; interim non-disclosure and delivery up orders are justified pending the return day.

Court Disposition

Interim injunction granted

Orders

  • Interim non-disclosure order against respondent
  • Order for delivery up of documents to applicant's solicitors